Back in March, the State Department published a notice in the Federal Register that they were proposing a new “Biographical Questionnaire” for (some) passport applicants. But the notice didn’t include the proposed form itself. Curious, and concerned, we requested a copy of the proposed form from the State Department contact person listed in the Federal Register notice.

What’s consistent across that political spectrum is the outrage. From fewer than 50 public comments in the State Department docket on Friday, the count went to more than 900 before the comment deadline yesterday (Monday) at midnight. But that’s not all. State Department docket clerks are still processing the backlog of last-minute submissions, which can take up to a couple of weeks. By lunchtime today, the count of public comments was up to more than 3000. We haven’t had time to read them all, but we haven’t found any in those we sampled that support the State Department’s proposal.

Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) (”As a world leading industry competing in global markets, our members depend on the ability to freely and easily travel across international borders. We are concerned that the new passport information requirements proposed by the DOS are onerous, unduly burdensome, and will prohibit or discourage legitimate international travel by American citizens…. CEA urges the DOS to withdraw its proposal for Form DS-5513.”)

Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) (late-filed comments questioning the adequacy of the State Dept. notice and requesting that the State Dept. issue a more detailed notice and allow another public comment period)

In addition to the comments submitted to the Department of State, here are some of the other discussions of this issue going on around the Web as news of this scheme spreads:

Seemingly the only voice raised in support of the proposed questionnaire was from Arthur Frommer, who stressed the fact that only some people (presumably other people) would have to complete the new form. Frommer’s position drew criticism from his own readers, with one commenter in Frommer’s blog saying that they were “Disappointed… in Arthur” and another writing, “In this, your only justification seems to be ‘Calm down, everyone, I just learned that this regulation won’t affect me.”’ (In the same article, Frommer also says he thinks that protests against TSA virtual strip-search and geneital groping policies has “dwindled … in the wake of a realization by the public of the role that the TSA plays in protecting us from terrorism.” Right. It’s all for our own good.)

Many people found the State Department proposal so outrageous that they assumed it must be a hoax. It’s not. We understand that it may seem fishy that the State Department chose to publish a notice in the Federal Register that it was proposing a new form, but didn’t publish the proposed form itself in the Federal Register. But that was their choice of how to proceed, not ours. We were sent the proposed Form DS-5513 in March, in response to our request, by the person identified in the Federal Register notice as the point of contact from whom it could be obtained: Alexys Garcia, GarciaAA@state.gov, 212-736-9216. We immediately published the form we received from the State Department here on our website. There’s more at the links in the sidebar on who we are and how to contact us, as well as links to press reports on our previous work and currentprojects. Like the co-signers of the comments we submitted to the State Department, and the other commenters listed above, we’re for real, and so is this proposal from the State Department. We wish this were a hoax, but it’s not.

What happens next? It’s up to the State Department whether to submit the proposed form to OMB for approval along with the overwhelming record of public opposition, to modify the proposal, or to withdraw it entirely. The deadline for public comments on this specific proposal has passed, but it’s not to late to tell Congress and the President to take action to restore the freedom of movement guaranteed by the First Amendment and international law — and, while they are at it, to rein in the TSA. We’ve got a little list of actions they could take to start that process.

We usually find that when the State wants no opposition they mask the routes where the public can find fault or respond. You and others opposed who feel more public input may be required to make a difference could ask for more time from the State Department. This is so the public has time to better respond to the gestures on citizenship and demand for outrageous amounts of documentation.

I sent my comments by mail to Ms. Garcia in mid-March shortly after you posted your original entry on this matter. Should I be concerned that they are nowhere to be found in the linked public docket? Indeed, as far as I can tell, there are no comments at all there posted before April 14, which seems strange.

[...] Papers, Please! Challenging ID Demands The Identity Project explores and defends the fundamental American right to move freely around our country and to live without constantly having to prove who we are or why we are here. Home The Issue Who We Are What We Do Secure Flight Featured Cases Policy Analysis Lawyer’s Corner Take Action Press Room Contact Us Friends « Public outrage at proposed questionnaire for passport applicants [...]

What I find so ironic about all of this, as an adopted person, is that the government wants us to prove our identities and citizenship in such an exhaustive manner…but for 6 million people (the adopted) it is the government that is withholding from us the documents that give us the ability to do so!

Only 6 states in the U.S. provide Adult Adoptees with unhindered access to their own Original Birth Certificates. Up until last year when I finally unsealed my OBC, I would not have been able to answer one question on this new proposed form. Even now without this form, many adoptees are denied passports or have difficulty obtaining driver’s licenses because their Amended Birth Certificates are not adequate in proving their identity.

I am 68 years old and my parents are deceased. For the life of me I could not accurately fill out that darn form. I used to be able to remember where my parents lived, but that escapes me now. The apartment they live in has long since been demolished and the street on which it stood was eradicated in a highway straighting and widening project so I don’t even have any visual references. As far as employment goes, I cannot count on my being a carrier/salesman for two newspapers while I was in middle and high school but the route managers I reported to have both died as have my supervisors from my summer jobs will I was re-started my college education, although the businesses still exist.

There are many more details in that form that I am unable to provide accurately so I am glad I already have a passport! .

You know EXACTLY why the form is so outrageous. It is so very outrageous, so that way when they scale down to only LESS outrageous, people will be willing to compromise and accept it. You can hear them saying, “Well, at least it’s not so bad now that they scaled it back some… so I’m okay with it.”.

I have been denied a passport. I .was given a letter by the state dept, to provide 10 documents 10 years old or older.I provided the info necessary. I was written back on anther letter from the state dept. That my proof was innsuffiecient for passport purposesIt seems they always need more and they know who I am. I hold a gun permit I sent tax records an school records and still they dont know. I have asked why I have been singled out and they will not give me a reason why!

[...] include the form itself. After I obtained and published the proposed Form DS-5513, the story went viral (I wasquoted on the same day by both Glenn Beck and the Daily Kos!) and more than 3,000 public [...]

[...] Ignoring massive public opposition, and despite having recently admitted that it is already using the “proposed” forms illegally without approval, the State Department is trying again to get approval for a pair of impossible-to-complete new passport application forms that would, in effect, allow the State Department to deny you a passport simply by choosing to send you either or both of the new “long forms”. [...]

[...] Edit This The new U.S. passport application forms are back, worse than ever. Ignoring massive public opposition, and despite having recently admitted that it is already using the “proposed” forms illegally [...]